Klarinet Archive - Posting 000336.txt from 2000/10

From: Bilwright@-----.net (William Wright)
Subj: Re: [kl] All keys are not the same
Date: Sat, 7 Oct 2000 13:29:44 -0400

<><> Dan Leeson wrote:
And so that I am not accused of wickedness, this is not a flame. This is
a technical discussion.

Agreed!

<><> It seems to me that you characterize one clarinet type as
having the ability to play more "sweetly" than another. I think you may
mean that you prefer one over the other (which is perfectly fine with
me) but I cannot even comprehend what you mean by "sweet," a word used
to describe the activity of a different and quite unrelated sense organ.

Instantly we are back in the same old mess as always! If different
parts of the human nervous system and human self-awareness
simultaneously interact with each other and yet can't be used to
describe each other, what 'sense' can we make of anything at all?

<><> I disagree completely with your expressed notion that one
clarinet is selected over the other by a composer because of the
character of its sound, no matter by what words you chose to describe
that sound ("sweet" for example).
I'm caught off guard here, Dan, and somewhat astonished. Spectral
measurements show (so far as I have read, such as the graphs in Benade)
that there are reproducible differences in the overtone ratios of
variously tuned clarinets, such as A vs. Bb.

<><> but what would allow you to conclude that underlying all of
these reasons is the issue of overall pleasantness of sound character of
one such instrument over the other, and that this sound character is
based on key selection, or (as you suggested) major/minor mode usage?

I must be missing something here. Surely you agree that minor keys
are more "plaintive" than major keys?
...but look at the (perhaps subconscious) transition in your own
language. I never once mentioned the word "pleasant" in my post. You
used it many times instead of "sweet". This is OK by me -- I agree that
sweetness is pleasant -- but you have made the leap from one sensory
impression to another without a second thought. I _don't_ criticize
this. I think that it is valid and that it is part of 'rational'
behavior. But I want to point out that you, like any other human being,
do it too.

In general, I can sympathize with the lack of precision inherent in
metaphors -- dark, sweet, ragged, centered, and so forth -- but these
words *do* describe human responses, and they do describe what goes on
inside our nervous systems, no matter how imprecisely.
We would be impoverished without these 'near synesthesias' <my
computer's spell checker doesn't even know the word 'synesthesia', it's
a plot, I tell you!> and they must not be pushed aside. This is, of
course, the underlyig theme of robot and computer stories wherein the
soulless machine is inferior because it can't understand or participate
in human feelings and emotions.

Cheers,
Bill

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe from Klarinet, e-mail: klarinet-unsubscribe@-----.org
Subscribe to the Digest: klarinet-digest-subscribe@-----.org
Additional commands: klarinet-help@-----.org
Other problems: klarinet-owner@-----.org

   
     Copyright © Woodwind.Org, Inc. All Rights Reserved    Privacy Policy    Contact charette@woodwind.org